Here are the PDFs as well if you want to read:
Self Imposed Sanctions just released
"The University is satisfied that the initial media reports were greatly exagerated if not flatly incorrect."
- Go Blue to that!
The media aren't going to read past the first paragraph where it says:
"The University admits the violations alleged in fact occurred. The University is disappointed that its history of no major infractions cases in its football program has ended"
Okay, maybe they'll actually also read the self imposed sanctions portion.
"The University is satisfied that the initial media reports were greatly exaggerated if not flatly incorrect."
I was not sure that Gene Marsh, Dave Brandon and President Coleman would go that route. I wasn't expecting it. I am totally delighted that they included that statement, and I am totally delighted that the tone of this thing has some defensivesness and some backbone to it. Whatever we paid Lightfoot and Marsh and his associates, I think it was worth it.
On WTKA, winding up his program just before 10 am, Ira Weintraub made this point: To all of the listeners who were waiting for him to follow through on his long-standing pledge to apologize to the Free Press if an apology were warranted after the huge initial splash -- it ain't coming. Ira's not apologizing, and the Free Press doesn't deserve an apology. Ira called the Freep's August story something beyond "exaggeration." He said it bordered on fabrication.
Ira's right. The Free Press story was bullshit, and nobody owes any apologies or 'you-told-us-so's' to Rosenberg and Snyder.
Ira laid it out -- If Mark Snyder wants to come on the program with Ira and Sam, and explain the details of the reporting and the claims in the original front-page story, the invitation is there.
... the Freep.com website, predictably, runs this with banner headlines. A headline story by Rosenberg, Snyder, and Gene Marsh; plus an opinion column by Drew Sharp. And not one, single mention of anything in relation to the Michigan Response's criticisms of the original newspaper story. Nothing. As if the words were never included.
If any of you have any allusions as to whether the Michgan football program is at war with the Detroit Free Press, and if any of you still think that the Free Press is just in the business of reporting news, let this be the end of that. It is now a matter of record -- the Freep claimed that the Michigan football program was routinely doing things to put its student-athletes at risk. Michigan denies it. There's no middle ground. No reconciliation. The Free Press is not apologizing for apparent errors and exaggerations in its reporting. As a virulent critic of the Free Press, I am not apologizing to Rosenberg, Snyder, and Paul Anger. This is war.
any chance UM can go after freep for malicious slander? i know UM is admitting some wrong doing, but they are clearly acknowledging "greatly exagerated, incorrect" reports. how can a publication get away with this without any reprimand themselves. if they do it will only fuel the fire for continued abuse and sensationalism by the media. something should be done. fire-bombing? lawsuit? mass-wedgies?... i say lawsuit that shuts their doors!
The White House tried to "declare war", in a manner of speaking, against Fox News. The other media outlets came to the aid of ... Fox News. The lesson here: don't go to war with the media; they protect their own.
It is Dan Rather. And Rathergate. How'd that one work out for Dan Rather?
As for a libel suit against the Free Press -- no way. Zero probability.
The frustrating thing; the really annoying thing, is that the Freep jihad is itself a story. And enterprising reporter could work that story. God knows, there are few people who are pursuing it. And a lot of people that would read it. Yes, a lot of the press sticks together. We'll see today how this gets covered.
Seems like Brian pretty much nailed it. Nothing surprising here
1) 40% of the quality control staff will be cut for this year
2) QC staff isn't allowed to attend coaches meetings, games
3) Michigan went over by 65 hours , and will give back 2:1 hours.
4) RR and Michigan deny that they didn't have institutional control
5) Students weren't put into a abusive situation with regards to practicing.
not dropping a coach then
No coaching jobs cut. Just QC guys.
Seems fair seeing as most of the trouble comes from QC guys, not coaches.
Brandon said the school decided not to take away scholarships or eliminate coaching positions. "That's usually a result of something deemed to be an offense that created a competitive advantage," Brandon said. "Those kind of sanctions are also typically related to academic fraud, gambling, recruiting violations and extra benefits."65 hours of extra practice didn't provide a competitive advantage? Not sure I understand that fully.
First, competitive advantage is usually suggested as using ineligable players, paying players, or grossly exceeding practice times.
65 hours over 2 years isn't alot of time considering that the football program states that the time came from misunderstandings on CARA hours spent on stretching.
yeah I am going to have to go back and read the articles in depth later today when I have time. From what I remember of the discussions from a few months ago, a coaching loss seemed to be a pretty definite penalty, because of the number of coaches the NCAA said were on the staff, but like I said I am going off of memory which is not always a good thing early in the morning.
I sort of agree - being that one of the new coaches is a former QC guy promoted to the position, I thought it'd be likely his position would be eliminated for a year or two. I mean, is it really wise to get hit with the "QC guys were doing illegal coaching" rap and then let one of them be an actual coach using experience he presumably gained from coaching when he wasn't supposed to?
I think one of the issues they got into was that these QC guys were mislabeled. Correct me if I'm wrong but if they were called interns some of this stuff would have been ok, such as attending meetings etc. Other school have interns who can do most of the stuff, quality control or strength people cannot do regarding meetings and film.
The problem was with QC guys providing coaching instruction (technique improvement, etc.) during summertime 7 on 7s, which neither they nor interns nor anybody not labeled a coach is allowed to do at any time. The only people who can provide that kind of instruction are actual coaches, and their time is limited and it doesn't include the voluntary 7 on 7.
What is galling about the process is that these are what I would classify as technical violations. I daresay that most institutions would have similar issues or worse if they were to be microscopically examined as was the case with Michigan. My guess is that most major programs will not have much to say.
That's why the loss of scholarships, IMHO, would be inappropriate; it doesn't fit the crime.
I have no issues with the small picture; it's the big picture that bothers me.
even a violation is because people were around making sure they were practicing/working out properly. If you think these kids don't go WAY over that on their own at every school, you're crazy.
Stretching and warm up is not a competitive advantage
Well, technically it is if school A isn't counting it as CARA, and school B is, and therefore does 5 fewer sets of strength training.
"Had the student-atheletes warmed up and stretched on their own, the football program would not have exceeded weekly CARA limits." [p. 10]
If we assume school B is having them warm up and stretch "on their own," then there is no advantage -- both schools are doing the same amount of strength training.
3-9; 5-7. Seems to me that no one could compete with us.
Please note sarcasm.
I am sorry: what decisive competitive advantage did Michigan see on the field last season? Were there extraordinary athletes in the defensive backfield. No. Were our running backs unstoppable bulldozers? No. Was our O'line so conditioned that they didn’t suffer from injuries, or protect our QB so well that he didn't suffer an injury, much less have time to avoid mistakes? No.
Did we befuddle a Notre Dame coach into questionable play calls late in close game with the psychological application of Rawk music, and cause certain ND fans to pick at their faces? Well, maybe ...
Does our record indicate that it was an advantage?
And we are giving back 2 to 1. Let's see how much of a disadvantage this is...
...while the rule may have been violated, it wasn't a competitive advantage b/c everyone does it. Michigan just happened to get caught b/c employees of a certain newspaper decided to stop practicing journalism and instead dish dirt because they don't like people with country accents and people who are different from Bo/Mo/Lloyd in the way they do things.
I think it's more, a rule or two was violated, but it wasn't a competitive advantage because all it amounted to was stretching. Everybody stretches, we just didn't count out stretching time properly.
consider QC staffers coaches. M will drop 2 QC assistants.
5 to 3 and we are self-imposing the penalty that even though the NCAA changed the rules to basically allow what our QC guys were doing in the first place (except for Herron), we're not allowing ourselved to take advantage of that until next year. No, we're not dropping a formal coach off the staff (or taking a scholarship reduction), but it seems to me that we also left ourselves some room for teh NCAA to also impose these additional penalties if they want to "come down hard on Michigan"
I think you're sugar coating that one a bit. They were acting as S&C assistants in the off season when they were not allowed to. They advised in offensive skill drills which should have been done by "legal" S&C assistants. They guided stretching and warm up drills, which if those drills had been lead by the players only, then they would not have been coutable activities, and they would not have exceeded CARA limits.
What I want to know is why haven't they fired this Labadie person? This apparently was the person on Rich's admin staff who did not provide the QC staff job description to the compliance department when asked, not provide the internal CARA forms for a year when asked.
QC staff =/= S&C assistants.
Offensive skill drills can't be led by anyone but the players in the offseason. There is no "legal" assistant running skill drills. S&C advisors are there in case of injury.
I'm not sure if S&C personel are allowed to lead/advise players on stretching in the offseason, but I'm pretty sure that the CARA hours are from the season, not off-season because everythings supposed to be voluntary.
Yep, I get that if either S&C or QC staff conducted, or somehow particpated in streching and warm up, then that is a countable activity.
My interpretation of the response, is the points in time where the QC staff assited in skill specific S&C activities (taped towel handoffs, mini basketball passes, etc.) - that is where it would have been OK if it was S&C staff.
I think your confusing a few things. Michigan was accused of 1) QC personel observing/participating in offseason workouts. That in itself is a violation. There's no countable hours tied to that.
Michigan was also accused of going over CARA limits (via a misunderstanding of stretching rules) during the season. This is where the countable hours applies.There is no countable limit in the off season. It's all voluntary, so it's however long the players want to go about it.
Anything "skill" related isn't supposed to be monitored or assisted with in the offseason. It is all voluntary, player based activities. Trainers/SC guys are only there to treat injuries. If anyone besides players assisted with these, it's a violation.
Yep, I get that too. My read is if they had the proper first aid and CPR certifications, etc., then they could help with off season workouts as S&C staff. Since they didn't, they could not. And that activity is not a CARA violation, but a coaching limit violation.
On page 5 of the introduction, it seems that Scott Draper is the administrator who ignored the CSO's requests for QC staff job descriptions.
On page 9, Brad Labadie is the guy who fucked up the CARA forms in two ways:  Failing to provide the forms for all of 2008 and up to July 2009; and  omitting countable warm-up and stretching time on the forms after that.
Draper's position (Assistant Athletics Director for Football) seems pretty high up and makes me wonder about the role of the AD's office in this -- it seems they are responsible for providing job descriptions. The report repeatedly says the coaching violations could have been avoided if the job descriptions had been done when they were supposed to be done. The timing of Martin's resignation seems right around the time MSC would have learned about this failure.
Both Draper and Labadie still have their jobs, at least according to MGoBlue.
report is putting some of the blame on the CSO as well for not elevating to RR when repeated requests for the descriptions went unanswered. p. 8 of the intro.
Sadly, kind of an Office Space quality to some of this.
In fact we are adding an assistant S&C coach. Charlie accepted the position last night and I dont think there is anyone more qualified in the world in making sure people don't over exercise.
double spaces and size 13 font, looks like someone tried to make the 74 page min. by cheating
We love stretching.
we didn't have any QC people watching, while the report was being typed up..... If they instructed the Admin to hit spell check, we are screwed in August.......
How Dare Michigan not put itself on the Death Penalty....
Signed, Freep Staffers...
Just look at the first two pages, particularly the first footnote. While clearly trying to establish a tone of contrition and seriousness with regard to the report overall, there's a sharp look toward "initial media reports."
Also, I can't tell if it's brilliant or maddening that the PDF is not searchable or copy and pastable.
Interesting word choice. Impugn derives from the Italian word impugno which means "to attack" (with the Latin prefix "im-" [not] and root "-pugnus" [fist] implying nonphysically) but the usage has shifted over the past few centuries to mean calling into question, I'm guessing due to its use in law. It doesn't necessarily mean to affect adversely anymore. In that sense, last August was hardly the first impugnment of Rodriguez's integrity or character*. I feel we're seeing some first-class lawyering here - impugn is technically used correctly to describe "self-appointed pundits" questioning Rodriguez, and also implies to the casual reader the Free Press Jihad that the athletic department cannot come out and directly say.
*Do these mean different things? PR babble, to me.
I love that they're making sure this is part of every version that is released. This from U-M's news service:
"U-M found no evidence of student-athlete abuse, nor any evidence that its employees disregarded student-athlete welfare. This is in stark contrast to early media reports."
I know they have to be all legal and stuff, but I would have just loved a one word response from Coach Rod: NUTS.
ESPN did UM no favors yesterday on College Football Live. The "experts" basically said that UM is a repeat offender and the NCAA will come down heavy. The same idiots that brought us "Les Miles to Michigan" is now hurting UM by telling everyone Doom and Gloom. I hope on today's show they change their tune after the press conference. Positive thoughts people.
The good Detroit newspaper's story. Little speculation, just quotes and facts: http://www.detnews.com/article/20100525/SPORTS0201/5250377/U-M-announces...
This is great news for the program and in particular for Coach RR. DB and the athletic department stood up for Coach in a HUGE way. Perhaps the beginning of a new chapter for RR in AA?
This is a terrible day for the program, because the publicity hurts the program nationwide, as it has already hurt recruiting. And the administration did what it had to do with RR, as long as they determined it wasn't a deliberate mistake by him. This changes nothing, this year is about wins and losses-if he doesn't win he will be gone.. We will get past this for sure, and a winning season, as Brian has said often, will cure this. But your response to this seems rather blind IME. I think the violations were serious but relatively minor, and that our response and self-imposed sanctions were correct. But a good day? Not really.
Not appropriate, IMO. It's not like today is party time and 1987 is here harshing your mellow. I doubt Dave Brandon would call this a great day.
I am sure RR and DB are relieved to have gone public with the self-imposed sanctions. Not a great day, but it is necessary surgery to get the bleeding stopped and the healing started. It puts the violations in perspective and shows that the AD and school stand by the coach and that has to help put some recruits at ease.
Obviously this doesn't fit anyone's definition of great, but short of UM coming out with incontrevertible proof that they're innocent of all charges, what more could you really have hoped for from their report? Today's release is as good as I could have reasonably expected it to be.
While not a "great" day for the program, compared to what some feared might happen, this is a fairly light punishment. I don't think this will particularly harm us in recruiting if we start winning this yest. IMHO, more recruits are skittish to come here because of the fact that they aren't sure the same coach is going to be here all 4 years(a fair concern to be sure). I would be willing to bet they dwarf the number of recruits concerned because "ZOMG MAJOR VIOLATIONS!!!'.
completely homerish opinion of "great day." While it may not be a "terrible day" as I categorized it either, it at least is a sobering one. And there is a possibility that the NCAA won't accept the self-imposed sanctions since because of a stupid technicality they consider us "repeat offenders" due to the Martin thing.
Not a great day, sure. But about as positive as we could have hoped for given the circumstances we've known about for a long time.
But you are forgetting this is "self imposed penalties". There is still the slippery slope that the NCAA may feel M was to easy on itself, and with them sitting on their high horses, may impose even stronger penalties.
The process of asking the university to reply with sanctions they feel fit the crime is BS. In this case many so called experts felt scholarships would be lost. Since M did not impose this on themselves, the NCAA leaves themselves the option of saying you don't really understand what you have done wrong, so we need to punish you even more.
The ones that write occasional columns for national sports media? The ones that write for local papers?
Or the one that HEADED THE COMMITTEE for 9 years, that Michigan hired. Scholarship reductions only make sense if any of our issues would have been likely to lead to signing players improperly, using inelligible players, etcetera. It makes little sense to take away scholarships when the accusations had zero to do with players or recruiting, at all. THAT would show we didn't know what we'd done wrong.
nor Bruce Dickinson...
It's a good day in one way: If this isn't the end of this whole ordeal, it's at least the beginning of the end.
I think it's also a good day to wear maize.
"I think the violations were serious but relatively minor..."
I think you got that half right. This was the equivalent of getting a ticket for driving 62 mph in a 55 mph zone. Now, it still bothers me that RichRod's clumsiness (as an administrator and all that) is probably part of the picture, but I think he'll be fine. I have high hopes that Brandon will be able to help him in that area.
fucking joke period
Even more stupid: because our QC staff were present at the extra 20 minutes of stretching, we went over. If they hadn't been, it would have been voluntary, and thus no violation.
Yes - the joke is on us. Ha ha Rosenberg. Very funny. Many thanks to you. The University should review your student records and revoke your degree.
This sucks, but glad to be moving toward closure.
The "fucking joke" is that our QC guys and our coaches allowed it to happen.
20 minutes? Yeah, no big deal.
20 minutes repeatedly? That's kind of a big deal. That's an extra 3+ weeks of "practice time."
Yes, which is over 1.5 weeks per year. That's not insignificant.
except the time wasn't "drills running over" and amounted as a result of not understanding rules, not overage of 2 hrs intentionally carried out. but keep up the 1.5 weeks/year of "practice" meme. it succeeds to badly.
You're right. It wasn't "drills running over." It was stretching not being counted in order to prevent drills from running over.
people see it as a good day since, for the most part, all of the violations are being atoned for. From this point forward, until the NCAA ruling comes out, we can focus on football.
This kind of fills a void, where recruits prior to today could be told that Michigan was going to have a postseason ban or something that would tangibly affect recruits. Now that people can see what's being done, theres not that huge "What if" hanging over the program.
Interesting how they said that the media allegations were largely crap or at the very least, a gross exaggeration.
funny and again misleading how they ... state "UM found guilty of major violations".
What a group of tools ... Go Blue !!! Lets move on and win some game this Fall.
Hell, let's win several games this fall!
They weren't found guilty of major violations, they admitted that they had committed major violations. They agreed with the findings of 4 of the 5 major violations that were laid out by the NCAA. The newspaper isn't that far off base. Just because they seem like minor violations, only secondary violations are not considered "major".
This is (allegedly) a newspaper, which means that, with the exception of opinion pieces, (i.e. editorials and columns) they are supposed to print facts, (not that such a limitation ever stopped this particular publication before).
In February, the NCAA made the accusations, and yesterday, UM admitted some wrongdoing. These are not the same as having been found "guilty".
"Close" only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes.
How was the Free Press wrong?
Not a particularly different take, but thought it was interesting to read the U-M Record's article as a Michigan publication: http://www.ur.umich.edu/update/archives/100525/ncaa
Brandon reiterated last night that Rodriguez's job is safe, according to an article at annarbor.com (see below). Note also that the two of them will address the media via teleconference at 11 am today.
Despite a provision in Rodriguez’s contract that allows Michigan to fire him for committing a major violation, Brandon said there are no plans for that to happen now or in the future.
“We’ve been very public and very open over the fact that we do not believe, based on the circumstances that are before us, that it would be appropriate to have it impact the employment status of our coach,” Brandon said. “We’ve made it real clear that he’s going to be our coach in the fall. We made it real clear that these problems, although unfortunate, don’t rise to the level of triggering termination.”
Brandon, who’ll address the media along with Rodriguez via teleconference today, called Monday a “day of relief,” though Michigan’s ordeal is not yet over.
acknowledges full fault, without making it sound worse than it is. It protects Rodriguez by stating that yes, maybe he should have asked for some of this stuff, but he never actually knew he was supposed to be getting it in the first place.
I think they'll take that.
After reading through the Univeristy's response, it appears that Labadie and Draper should have some explaining to do.
after reading the report, I'm led to believe that the CARA form issue was a systemic one going back who-knows-when. Agreed that there are some people in compliance who seem to be the primary perpetrators.
Adam Rittenberg at his ESPN blog made a similar point about Labadie and Draper in his thoughts on U-M's response and then added an important observation (indicated with added italics):
Michigan definitely spreads the blame around in its response. The compliance office takes a beating, as do Scott Draper, the school's assistant athletic director for football, and Brad Labadie, the school's director of football operations. I think it's significant that several of the people reprimanded don't have firm ties to Rodriguez and were at Michigan during the previous coaching regime.
I hope someone with some common sense asks at the presser how can they repeatedly ignore inquiries about compliance? I would like to hear Draper and Labadie explain that one personally, but doubt we will ever hear them speak on this matter.
Michigan will issue letters of reprimand to seven people it deems responsible for the violations: Mike Barwis, Scott Draper, Brad Labadie, Joe Parker, Rich Rodriguez, Judy Van Horn and Ann Vollano.
The school states that the violations regarding countable coaches and countable hours for players stemmed from multiple factors: inattention by the coaching staff (led by Rodriguez), poor communication between compliance (led by Van Horn) and the strength and conditioning staff (led by Barwis) and the inability of athletic administrators (namely Draper) to inform compliance about the duties of quality control staff.
Translation: Everyone is at fault, and the violations could have been prevented if people had done their jobs better. But aside from Herron, who lost his job, no individual takes the fall. At least not yet.
In his separate response, Rodriguez admits to some wrongdoing but also addresses the obvious confusion regarding quality control coaches and what they can and cannot do. "There seems to be some ambiguity and confusion about what constitutes coaching activity under NCAA legislation that can be conducted only by countable coaches." The NCAA is trying to get a handle on this issue and might make an example out of Rodriguez/Michigan, but it would seem a little hypocritical to do so. If there wasn't some degree of confusion (i.e. loopholes), you wouldn't see coaching staffs become as big as they are.You can take this of one of two ways- A. They're spreading the blame so no one person really takes the fall for it or B. The rule is confusing enough that no one really understood it, from the coaches who are supposed to know what they are allowed or not allowed to do, to the staff that's supposed to tell them what's ok or not. I lean towards B. It sounds like obtuse rules, and there is no "villain" in it. But to say Rich was just an innocent victim isn't really correct either. He got a reprimand too. But there's a lot more to read. And of course, to see how the NCAA reacts. Because we can go "yaayyyyy, we didn't really do anything wrong." And if the NCAA doesn't agree (they DID issue all those violations), we have a big fight on our hands. That we don't need right now. But fingers crossed that they say "that's good", and we can move on.
Nice summary and cut-n-paste
As I'd thrown down on Friday, there was plenty of gray area in these "rules."
Come on, really: If the players stretch on their own, it's not countable.
If they have oversight by S&C vs. oversight by QC, those are counted differently?
Here's to a quiet summer.
In a new Rittenberg post titled What They're Saying about U-M's Response, this sentence was interesting for what was missing from it:
His summary of the messages he got from U-M's responses seems spot on to me:
Here's the message I get from Brandon in all this: What happened was unfortunate, and casts a negative light on Michigan. Many people screwed up, so pinning this all on Rodriguez is unfair. In fact, the potential for these problems was there before he arrived. And let's be real honest: this isn't paying players or academic fraud we're talking about. The media grossly exaggerated much of this stuff. We respect the NCAA's investigation, but to penalize us further would be excessive and somewhat hypocritical, given the vagueness of rules around quality control coaches, etc. If you expect me to fire Rodriguez based on these violations, keep waiting. Now if he goes 5-7 again ...
Here's the message I get from Rodriguez: I made some mistakes here, and these violations took place on my watch, which is disappointing. But I'm not the only one who screwed up, as there were communication and monitoring breakdowns elsewhere. I'm not going to downplay the violations, but they aren't capital crimes, as the media might want you to believe. This process was brutal, but it's nearing an end. I'm not going anywhere yet, so let me coach my football team. I know I need to win this season, so let's get on with it.
Those who are going the the extremes (less here than other outlets), wanting to say "IT'S ALL RICH ROD'S FAULT", or "RICH ROD DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG...IT WAS EVERYONE ELSE"...are both just, well, silly. A number of people made mistakes, most minor. And when compounded, they became something...I don't know...medium? Even that seem an overstatement. But those who think Rich didn't do anything wrong - Rich disagrees with you. And those who think Rich should be thrown under the bus - well, the University disagrees with you.
my boy Rittenberg
You've been reading too many of Irish's posts
While the University takes the violations very seriously, the actual violations are a far cry from the initial claims in the media.or even better, this one (bottom of page 1):
... the University is satisfied that the initial media reports were greatly exaggerated if not flatly incorrect.One main goal of the report achieved: put to rest the ridiculous freep article and shoddy reporting by MR once and for all.
Our Constitution works; our great Republic is a government of laws and not of men.
the right person at the right time.
I am so glad to have Brandon out front on this. I've never had any doubt about his selection as AD, but this whole issue really re-affirms how much confidence I have that he'll both represent the school well and make sound decisions as AD.
I knew that Brandon was thoroughly competent; with a truly superb resume for AD. I knew that Bradnon loved the University and understood it as well or better than anybody. That was all for the good.
But I also knew that Brandon, as a p.r.-conscious leader of a large, p.r.-intensive company, understood that battles with the press are usually losers for large public and corporate insititutions. And I expected -- feared, really -- that Brandon would go way out of his way to avoid conflict with the Free Press. I expected -- really was convinced -- that influence from Mary Sue Coleman would cause the University to pull back from any counterattack against the Free Press.
And so I am delighted that those expectations were wrong. Personally, this is my Brandon moment. (I remained unconvinced even after his first couple of press conferences.) This is a huge, gigantic step for him, to back up his program against the Free Press. This is a kick-ass report. I am thrilled, and especially thrilled at what it says about David Brandon.
I'm getting from the various media is that the punishment fits the crime, as the crime is described by UofM. If the NCAA were to feel that the crime was worse than UofM does, then they might find the punishment a little weak, BUT, it would be pretty hypocritical of them to find Michigan more heavily at fault, given how helpful, forthcoming, and resolute in fixing things Michigan has been, so this'll probably get accepted.
Until it happens anymore. Anything can happen and will.
for trolls, sparty's and the Freep's editors.
what are you talking about? It's over now.
We go in front of the NCAA for a kabuki dance in August and then we start kicking ass shortly thereafter.
No More Jihad!!!
However, Rosenberg is probably still punching dolphins.
There are two perspectives here, both equally valid.
1. This sucks. It's always tough to see the program dragged through the mud, and someone was clearly in the wrong at some point. We need to take our lumps and deal with it, and we have.
2. This is great. Whoever put this document together did a great job of attempting (because we know things will still be skewed in the media) to clarify the fact that while there was some wrongdoing, the extent and nature of the infractions wasn't anywhere close to the armageddon-inducing level implied by the media in the first place.
The sanctions suggested seem highly appropriate, and hopefully the NCAA sees it that way as well. I have no idea what their perspective on this is, but attempting to look at the situation from as neutral a position as possible (admittedly not all that neutral), Brandon has come off as completely sincere and honest throughout the entire process. His work so far has been invaluable.
LOL at practice gate. All along, i've been one of the least worried fans about this. And, I remain so.
And, despite what message board trolls might do (seriously, we give a rip what douchnozzles on MLive and RCBM say? We're not all Tater, yo) , this is a good day for the school and program. We're a larger step closer to the finish line of this issue. Brandon, himself, called it a day of relief. The AD has the program and the football coach's back on this.
I could less about these sanctions. And this scandal. It's one big fucking yawn
what are they saying? I'm not going to waste my time with them, but I imagine they're all bitching and moaning about how M let itself off so light, and MSU would never do anything like this (except, you know, way, way worse stuff, 15 years ago), and we should be stripped of half our scholarships forever or something.
After a few minutes of poking, it seems like they're taking the same position anyone would when a rival school announces something like this.
- The self imposed penalties are a joke.
- Rich Rod is a snake because he originally claimed to have done nothing wrong and now admits his errors freely.
- Brandon is a smooth-talking spin doctor that is making this sound as nice as possible.
- Jokes about how Brandon is and should be confused about what competitive advantage is, given our product on the field the past two years.
Nothing surprising, and I can't really blame them. It's exactly what I would expect, especially from Sparty.
So you couldn't care less. But yes, well said.
We will beat you with one arm tied behind our back...
This is completely unrelated but lol at the Sporting News report on this issue where under the You might also like, it has the report on CC Sabathia being traded to the Brewers...because yes that is related to this story.
The essence of UM's response is clear: There was no institutional loss of control, RR did not foster an atmosphere of non-compliance, and players were not being abused in any way, shape, or form. In other words, Rosenberg and Snyder and the Freep are completely full of shit.
Whether the NCAA will see it this way is obviously the most important thing going forward, but UM's response puts the management of the Freep in an interesting position. That proud publication invested a lot of resources in publishing their allegations, and now the target of those allegations has basically said, "You wasted your time on this." No newspaper with the legacy and history of the Freep wants to be told that publicly, because it directly criticizes its credibility as a news source. I'm sure the Freep is already drafting its angry response to UM, and what I'm curious about is whether it will contact the NCAA directly to try to justify its allegations. Will the Freep double down? Will it ratchet up its adversarial role?
I noticed the Freep has absolutely no mention of the line about the actual allegations being a "far cry" from what was originally stated in the media.
While it won't save his sorry excuse for a newspaper, Rosenberg got what he ultimately wanted from this article: he's now a regular columnist for Sports Illustrated. He has a truly national audience and will likely have a long career. UM and RichRod were just grist for his mill.
As he is a UM grad himself, it demonstrates just how self-serving he really is. Nothing and no one, not even a tale spun out of the most meager of yarn, is out of bounds. He is contemptible.
EDIT: And if he ever shows up at a meeting of the AAUM, I will personally piss in his drink.
When I didn't renew my SI subscription last month, I sent them a letter telling them that the fact they were running his columns was the SPECIFIC reason I no longer wanted my subscription.
Nice gesture, but knowing how SI has treated Michigan over the years, I'd doubt they're really worried.
Just give him the ol swizzle stick.
1. I don't think the August '09 story won him a job at SI.com. I think he'd been a contributor before.
2. I wish Rosenberg success at SI.com, in the hope that he leaves Michigan, for good, and spends the rest of his career writing about Australian-rules football and French Open tennis.
Michael Rosenberg has broken the story of rampant cheating in the world of tractor-pull competitions....
It can be said that Michigan is now running the cleanest program in college football. The scrutiny to which they have been subjected demands it. It's sorta like the theory that an airline which has just had a crash is the safest to fly. Anyway, this will make it even better when RR's vision fully takes shape in the form of a National Championship-caliber team.
We just got paroled and are trying not to get shipped back up the river. Surprised?
The thing that scares me most is that UofM is using a law firm based out of Alabama. Don't they know they're going to get sabotaged with this firm's obvious SEC ties?
What would SEC schools do in this situation.
Those penalties should more than suffice in the eyes of the NCAA.
The NCAA still has the right to throw whatever sanctions at us they deem appropriate, right? When will that decision be made? In the fall?
I agree though, it seems unlikely they will hit us harder than we've already hit ourselves.
The NCAA still has to "punish" Michigan football. The belief is that they will accept Michigan's self punishment as enough, because presumably Michigan did their homework in understanding what the infractions committee will accept (plus the council that M hired used to be the head of that committee).
My take is the NCAA will stamp these and add on a few minor actions for good measure. I think the University has done a good job of selecting appropriate sanctions to the violations, and leaving the NCAA some room to add their two cents on top.
This is politics, you want to be open and self-accountable, but the NCAA needs to be able to look like they are in charge. Looking back at some of the precedent cases, the NCAA added on a few censures in each case. Rich, and others will probably get a letter from the NCAA, some requirements around remedial NCAA compliance training, etc. I don't expect scholarships, or anything major, but we have to expect the token gestures of oversight.
It's also possible to argue that this is a model for a self-investigation/response, and the NCAA will want to encourage other schools facing allegations to do similarly thorough jobs. So no additional sanctions is possible.
The University hasn't disputed any allegations. The punishment for practice hours seems to be well established. The reduction in QCs seems measured. I think the only battleground for the NCAA to come back at Michigan is whether a competitive advantage arose as a result of the infractions.
Much Ado About Nothing, this whole fiasco is it.
Can we now,PLEASE return to the business of playing football.
So in the end, all this Free Press war against Michigan was for 65 hours of extra practice in 2 years? This is like me asking for a divorce because my wife bought too much booze for my birthday party. Somebody from Free Press must really hate Michigan or RR.
You can practice too much under the rules. There's no such thing as too much booze.
I know "there's no such thing as too much booze", but my point was that if you hate somebody you can pick a fight for no reason. You just came up with pitiful excuses and also try to exaggerate thinks making them look bigger than they are.
Ok, it's pretty much over now. Can we please move on now and get back to, you know, football?
I know we are not out of the woods yet, as the NCAA still has to make it's decision and we have to live with the penalties. I just hope this puts us one step closer to moving on and past this. Just rip the band-aid off and move on. Please.
Iron Man with the winged helmet. Love it. What do you call him, the "Iron Wolverine"?
I was thinking of simply calling him Brandon Graham…
I do like "Iron Wolverine"
Perhaps he's made of Dilithium?? "Dilithium Wolverine"
Kind of like when you have to write a 20 page essay at the end of the year - where you know the prof isn't gonna read it. I mean, I got to about page 40 and my eyes started to hurt, psh, like anyone's actually gonna read this...
Having read through both the UM and RR responses, I'm glad they have this all out in the open for anyone to read. If people do read the entirety of the responses, they'll see exactly how borderline some of these allegations really are (RR's response is more enlightening because he disputes allegations when, from memory, the University didn't dispute anything). Unfortunately, most will just read the headlines.
Personally, I found it hard not to read through the whole thing and not just laugh at some of the things considered violations by the NCAA:
- QC staff providing "coaching" because they responded when one of the QBs asked on the sideline what defense did you see on the last play rather than picking up the headset and asking Rod Smith
- Use of a foam football on a stick to simulate a snap during offseason voluntary skill development
- Qbs holding a taped towel in their hands when running footwork drills
It's also enlightening (and extremely frustrating) to read how these violations actually arose:
- the Sunday 1 hour mandatory lift was left off the detailed weekly schedule reviewed and agreed at the pre-season coaching offsite (attended by Labadie and compliance) because there were two shifts of lifting but then Labadie forgot to put it on the CARA form and compliance didn't call him on it
- the non-inclusion of the stretching on the CARA forms was agreed by compliance but only because they didn't know that (and didn't ask whether) part-time S&C staff not available to the entirety of the athletic department (ie the QCs) might be in attendance because they declined Barwis' invitation to observe an off-season S&C session
It seems awfully hard to put some of these things on RRs doorstep. I can't see the NCAA making the failure to promote an atmosphere of compliance charge against RR stick.
Way to go Freep. Having read most everything posted on the matter today can someone tell me what is the big deal? Go through any program with a fine tooth comb and tell me what you come up with. This situation is the product of a shitty paper and a few bitter former players. The practice hours hurts a bit but if we make bowl games over the next two years the impact should be some what negated. Now lets get back to returning UM to greatness.
As a life-long Michigan fan, as an alum, as someone who cares deeply for this University and its reputation, I never thought I'd see the day where Michigan Football would be put on probation. This is a sad, sad day.
I am glad David Brandon has responded to this in a very above-board, transparent way, and that's the only way to deal with it. And I think blaming the Free Press can only go so far, because obviously -something- was found, even if not to the extent they claimed, and we have to be punished for it. Yeah, it's minor, and yes, it's likely other schools do it and don't get caught, but that's not the point. The point is that Michigan has never been in this position before. And now we are. And I am not the only one who is extraordinarily disappointed in the Football staff, and the Athletic Department as a whole, that our previously unblemished record of NCAA compliance in football is now tarnished.
I hope Athletics has learned something from this, and I hope the proper protocols are put into place so that this NEVER happens again. And from the looks of things, that's exactly what they're doing.
I know you're a smart guy. I know that you have a long history with the University that we both love. I know that you've got a lot of historical information, and that you are also well informed on current events on this topic.
Do this; not for me, but for yourself... Read the Response prepared by Gene Marsh and Bill King at Lightfoot. It's about 70 pages. And read the Response by Rich Rodriguez authored by Scott Tompsett. It's slightly shorter. Skip the exhibits for the time being; just do the work on that first 130 pages or so. Read those reports, and then reflect on the gap -- the gulf, really -- between all of the inflamed statements of last August, and what really happened. You owe it to yourself, and to the football program to be at least that well informed.
I knew who you were replying to without having to see the post above. I'm going to read it myself now that it's available, thanks.